Yes I know that but does this justify it? Is it acceptable for consumers to be given false information? Or according to you this is fine and there is no need for any legislation here? I know the government leave this up to the companies but this basically means they can pretty much do whatever they want without any issues.

The government isn't being lazy, we simply are not their actual constituency (among many other problems). If you want consumer protection laws and enforcement, you have to pay for it. Whether it's taxes or the market, caveat emptor applies here.

Honestly though - headphone fidelity claims are not likely to rustle the jimmies of anyone not a hi-fi/head-fi geek. We aren't the 99%. We are totally different 0.000235%.

Also I am not talking about headphones alone but also all consumer electronics, food etc loads of things... But anyway this is completely irrelevant so I will keep my irritation on this matter to myself.

X-Fi as in Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi; the previous generation of Sound Blaster? One of the most popular soundcards of all time.

Crystalizer is an exciter function that it can deploy, and Creative marketed it as a "fidelity restoration" feature - it does not "fix" bad files, but it can make music sound more "fun" (it's an exciter, that it's job) - along the lines of the BBE Engine or a Pioneer Synthesis Processor. The Recon3D (the current Sound Blaster) has the same feature, re-branded as THX Crystalizer, thanks to a marketing agreement with THX.

Whenever I see "restore fidelity lost by compression" (be it Crystalizer, BBE Engine, or Beats Pro) I just think "hi-fi smile" - am I the only one who reads through that?

As far as other insane marketing claims - we could basically talk about every cable and power product manufacturer in audio, most of which make claims that make the Beats marketing pitch look tame by comparison.

Is what good? The Sound Blaster X-Fi? If yes, it's probably the best dedicated hardware audio processor ever conceived (perhaps SoundCore is better, but Creative is so tight-lipped about it's specifics); everyone else is just playing catch-up. That said, how important is a dedicated hardware audio processor in 2012? Not very.Edited by obobskivich - 7/23/12 at 10:39am

Yes I know that but does this justify it? Is it acceptable for consumers to be given false information? Or according to you this is fine and there is no need for any legislation here? I know the government leave this up to the companies but this basically means they can pretty much do whatever they want without any issues.

I'm not actually arguing against you. My political views would be more at home in Europe or Scandinavia. The government is you - do something about it. It's not someone else's job.

Yesterday I've heard them plugged into my sansa for live... men, for long I didn't heard so bad and unnatural sound. Few seconds hurted my ears too much, and took em of with "bleh!", putting original sansa hps back.

The government isn't being lazy, we simply are not their actual constituency (among many other problems). If you want consumer protection laws and enforcement, you have to pay for it. Whether it's taxes or the market, caveat emptor applies here.

Yeah, this, seriously. I pay enough taxes in Illinois and am absolutely not interested in paying for the government to (poorly) hound companies into releasing info anyone with half a brain could google.

Also, any of Beats competitors could call them out on their BS if they wanted to. Sennheiser knows almost anyone whose job requires them to wear headphones is probably rocking some HD25's anyways.